Cases 1 - 10 of 67
Edward Ridley v. Arthur Parker, et al
as 23-11198
Plaintiff / Appellant:
EDWARD TYRONE RIDLEY
Defendant / Appellee:
ARTHUR PARKER, LLL CORPORATION, DELBRA PERRY and others
Edward Ridley v. Karl Fort, et al
as 23-10492
Plaintiff / Appellant:
EDWARD TYRONE RIDLEY
Defendant / Appellee:
KARL FORT, TIMOTHY C. WARD and GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
Edward RidleyIn re: Edward Ridley
as 22-13461
Petitioner:
In re: EDWARD TYRONE RIDLEY
Respondent:
ATTORNEY GENERAL, STATE OF GEORGIA
Ridley v. Ward et al
as 1:2022cv03507
Plaintiff:
Edward Tyrone Ridley
Defendant:
Commissioner Timothy Ward, Warden Lawrence Wittington, Warden Ford Jackson Diagnostic and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Edward Ridley v. Commissioner, Georgia Department of Corrections, et al
as 22-12854
Plaintiff / Appellant:
EDWARD TYRONE RIDLEY
Defendant / Appellee:
COMMISSIONER, GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EPA and others
Ridley v. Wilks
as 1:2022cv02982
Petitioner:
Edward Tyrone Ridley
Respondent:
WARDEN WILKS
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
In re: Edward Ridley
as 22-12308
Petitioner:
In re: EDWARD TYRONE RIDLEY
Respondent:
ATTORNEY GENERAL, STATE OF GEORGIA
RIDLEY v. DOE et al
as 1:2022cv00108
Plaintiff:
EDWARD TYRONE RIDLEY, ESTATE OF MATTIE MAE BURCH and ESTATE OF JULIUS CAESAR FIELDS
Defendant:
JOHN OR JANE DOE
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
RIDLEY v. GIELOU et al
as 1:2022cv00104
Plaintiff:
EDWARD TYRONE RIDLEY
Defendant:
TINA FONDREN GIELOU, PEAK PROPERTY AND CASUALTY INSURANCE and AMERICAN CENTURY CASUALTY COMPANY
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
RIDLEY v. WARD et al
as 5:2022cv00246
Plaintiff:
EDWARD TYRONE RIDLEY
Defendant:
TIMOTHY WARD, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EPA and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
